Brexit

And get it overturned, wouldn't that be ironic.

 

In practice, I think the damage is more cosmetic than anything else. The bill to extend passed anyway, which was the main point of proroguing in the first place, and he managed to lose 21 of his own MPs in the process.

Labour have been handed a bit of a boost too since they were about to hit the self destruct button at their own conference, which has now been blown off the front pages. Gives Corbyn an easy win to say he turned up to parliament where Boris may well not.

Does limit the ability of the government to prorogue again though so he’s in a tricky situation. The Trade Bill is also now revived which could force a customs union position as our default Brexit position, so that’s one to maybe watch.

 

Dominic Grieve just on TV saying a General Election is not the answer because he believes there will be a hung Parliament, in his opinion the only way forward is a peoples vote, am I missing something..........Parliament already have a peoples vote which the received on Friday 24th June and Parliament have got themselves into this situation because the majority of MP's are not carrying out the wishes their constituents for voted.
What is annoying is when the likes of Dominic Grieve make these suggestions the interviewer doesn't ask and what if the result comes back similar as the last vote or possibly 51% against 49% in favour of leaving we are back where we started.
Let's have a General Election where all parties make known their stance on exiting the EU, not merely can't Labour reply to a straight forward question m"are you a remain party" which most know that's where they are going, but Corbyn will not put his faith in the British electorate and see his and Labour destiny.

 

Court cases in relation to domestic law happen in the courts on a daily basis, so this judgement won't make a scrap of difference to that.
Parliament passes laws, but the law of unintended consequences means that there are inevitably disputes about the application of those laws in practice, which go to the courts to adjudicate and make rulings on.
This judgement is no different except that it is more high profile than the everyday work of the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court because of its political significance.

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

As discussed many times, the big difference with a second referendum would be that we would be voting on the real choices available to us - No Deal, Remain or any deal that is on the table - as opposed to whatever form of unicorn Brexit was in people's heads when they voted for it.
What I don't understand is why Brexiteers are so afraid of a second referendum with real choices on the ballot paper. If No Deal is such a good idea it will win, won't it?

 

Well I am astonished that the SC ruled in such way against such a political background. The country is divided like never before and regardless of the SC saying it is not about Brexit they will be aware what Parliament has been doing.
I understand why Boris did it, but was always apprehensive.

The question is where do we go from here. If Parliament want to resolve the impasse then they should bring down the government but they won’t. I don’t like referendums, the way to go is GE. Calling for a 2nd referendum is an insult to the ppl who voted in 2016 who were categorically told this is a one off vote and what ever was decided would be enacted by the government. Since that time we have had GE whereby 85% voted for parties who said they would abide by that decision.

 

I still think it significantly more likely than not that we have a general election this year. There’s a much longer campaigning period for a referendum, which wouldn’t really serve anyone well.

The Lib Dems would go for a GE before a referendum (or they certainly should), the SNP want a GE, and I’m pretty certain that, push to shove, Labour do too. I think they just need Boris Johnson to have to live by the law and request the extension first. Calling a GE today, I think, would effectively put us out the EU without a deal. There wouldn’t be a government to request an extension in the time before 31st October.

 

Of course, that's why a GE is the answer now..

 

I don’t think the Electoral Commission would allow a three way referendum for that exact reason. Which is another reason for a GE. Nobody would know what on earth to put on the ballot paper, and it would certainly impact the legitimacy of said referendum.

If you state your referendum choices in a manifesto and then get elected on it, perfectly legitimate.

 

We could end up with a 49% 51% split either way, then what?

 

If I was him, I would ask for an extension to take us beyond a GE and no longer. We just have to prepare for a GE as soon as possible.

 

This is the usual stance from remainer's "What I don't understand is why Brexiteers are so afraid of a second referendum" maybe because we were told by the likes of Cameron, Osborne etc this vote was a once in a lifetime vote and that MP's would accept the outcome, I know what your reply will be, we didn't know at the time have the full knowledge what it will mean to our economy etc so how many new referendum votes do we have to have before the result is accepted.
Come on Steve we both know why the majority of MPs will not carry the electorates will out, they do not want to leave the EU in any capacity, lets say Boris comes back with a deal that gets around the back stop and we control out own destiny of leaving the EU totally, do you believe Labour would vote for it..............not a cat in hell's chance they would vote it down.